200hp 3.4l is it possible without power adder?

[MustangEater8251]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by ianwells100:


why??? i had a 3.4L camaro with catback and CAI, went to a stock 3.8L and there was a world of difference, and now i have the catback and CAI for my 3.8L its even better, and gets better fuel economy... i don't get what you mean above????

no offence, but the 3.4L engine's a really bad engine compared to the 3.8L, i dunno why ppl are so dear to them...<hr></blockquote>

Not trying to be dear to them just don't think its that big of a boost, maybe its just me, I seem to have one of the quicker 3.4Ls, and when I drive the 3.8L I have access to its actually slower then my 3.4L.

[Mikael]

Its been done. Took every bolt on, but stock heads/cam, etc. 200rwhp that is. Tim LeGros (i think was his name)

[MustangEater8251]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Mikael:
Its been done. Took every bolt on, but stock heads/cam, etc. 200rwhp that is. Tim LeGros (i think was his name)<hr></blockquote>

He had 200rwhp, with stock heads and cam? Not to sure about that.... unless you count Nitrous as a bolt on.

[93v6firebird]

3.4L suck a$$
They were overrated at 160hp, mostly because GM couldnt admit that after making the 2.8 to the 3.1 and then to the 3.4 they got ****ty gains. Its more like a 145-150hp and 125 at the wheels.
You'll need all boltons, lighten up the drivetrain, headers, and some internal engine work - p&pd heads, intake, valve job, rocker arms.
Honestly if you wanna get big gains out of your car buy tiago's turbo... if you wanna go all out strengthen the internals as well.
Just what I think.

[Ted]

An Lt1 could be had at so little. My friend bought a '94 Trans am for like 5600 and it was in really good condition. Most of you could sell your cars for that much. I dumped a lot of money into my car until I realized I wasn't getting no where fast. I'm not in the process of trying to sell it and buy a v8. Seriously guys, it's not that impossible. You might as well go big, or go home.

[95Batmobile]

This has turned into a bashing of the 3.4L when all the guy was asking was how to get 200rwhp.
Why don't you guys give the 3.4L some credit, it isn't that bad of a motor and sure as hell sounds a lot better than the 3.8L. It might not be as fast stock vs. stock, but this is a board where everybody is modifying their cars so how does stock vs. stock matter? My car is faster than a lot of 3.8 owners.

To answer the question, you will need a lot more work. If you don't want to do major work like heads/cam you can get every bolt on and a 50 shot and you'll be at 200rwhp. My car will be at 180rwhp N/A, stock internals, but I'm special ;)
Just keep workin on the 3.4L if you'd like, but if you want to go fast you will probably put a couple thousand in the car until you're stuck with one decision: turbo/super or LT/LS1.

[Ted]

Dude i'm not bashing the 3.4L by no means. I just wish that you guys could see it through my eyes. Your talking about modding a 3.4L to get 200hp, and to be faster right? But the thing is I have a 3.8 with several mods done and I am nowhere near fast. Your going to waste your money and be disappointed. I idea behind the 3.4L and 3.8L engine was for economy. I'm not saying that there isn't superchargers or turbochargers or how many other stuff you can do to the engines. All I am saying is that it isn't too practical to mod these engines for extreme amounts of horsepower. Me, I want something thats going to blow the doors off the competition. I'm not going to be getting anywhere fast with the 3.8L. I think a lot of you guys should re-evaluate the situation here.

[firstlove94]

Man its bad enough to have jerk-offs with v8's crashing threads and bashing v6's in general, but I am completely sick of 3.8 guys acting like they have HP up the A$$ and knocking 3.4's. I'll say this , nobody asked you about a 3.8, this is a question for 3.4 guys! Shut your piehole about how people's engines suck! It doesn't help answer the questions that are being asked! GEEZ!!

[Timbo1969]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 95Batmobile:
This has turned into a bashing of the 3.4L when all the guy was asking was how to get 200rwhp.
Why don't you guys give the 3.4L some credit, it isn't that bad of a motor and sure as hell sounds a lot better than the 3.8L. It might not be as fast stock vs. stock, but this is a board where everybody is modifying their cars so how does stock vs. stock matter? My car is faster than a lot of 3.8 owners.

To answer the question, you will need a lot more work. If you don't want to do major work like heads/cam you can get every bolt on and a 50 shot and you'll be at 200rwhp. My car will be at 180rwhp N/A, stock internals, but I'm special ;)
Just keep workin on the 3.4L if you'd like, but if you want to go fast you will probably put a couple thousand in the car until you're stuck with one decision: turbo/super or LT/LS1.<hr></blockquote>
The V8 is the better option in this equation easily. The LT-1 swap into a 93-97 can be done for under $3000. where as a super/turbo kit cost's $3500 and you have to rebuild the engine( to do it right). Simple if you want to get the best bang for your buck, get a V8.

[93v6firebird]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by firstlove94:
Man its bad enough to have jerk-offs with v8's crashing threads and bashing v6's in general, but I am completely sick of 3.8 guys acting like they have HP up the A$$ and knocking 3.4's. I'll say this , nobody asked you about a 3.8, this is a question for 3.4 guys! Shut your piehole about how people's engines suck! It doesn't help answer the questions that are being asked! GEEZ!!<hr></blockquote>

Dont take it so personally... I own a 3.4 and I realize they suck. Why cant you come to this realization as well?

[black34v6]

everyone always forgets me..

i have a 3.4L with 200 hp (flywheel) and 245 ft/lbs of tq. dyno proven. (with a cutout and no cat of course..)

it cost me about.. (calculates) - 60 for the heads/lower intake...50 for the fuel rail.. 30 for the lines.. 50 for the upper intake + Tb...about a week's worth of work.. and if you are doing this without a rebuild - (i rebuilt my motor) - then you need an extra 500.00 for pistons..

altho the aluminum heads could be done on the stock iron head pistons, you'd just have 12.5:1 CR. but it could be done.

the other thing that no one here seems to be able to get into their heads...

i havent done anything to the parts i got. the only "performance" parts i have on the engine are the headers. everything else i bolted on is factory stock (i.e. - came from GM that way: no porting/polishing/deburring or gasket matching involved)

i dont have a AFPR. i dont have a PCM reprogram. i have the stock 3.4 cam, i have the stock 3.4 bottom end, and i have grand am pistons (from a 3400) in my car. CR = 9.6:1 - and im putting out 170 rwhp / 207 rwtq.

thats the same as a 3.8, but a tad more tq ;) and more tq is always good.

my 1/4 mile time was ****ty, but im trying to get back now that i've learned how to handle the car better.. my last run was 16.0 @ 83 mph (2.49 60'). my baseline 1/4 mile (stock 3.4 with K&N FIPK / 3" exhaust) was 16.5 @ 84 mph (2.55 60') -- yes i need work on my launches.

anyway. its doable. just depends on how much work you wanna do. i would say for about 750 you too can have a 200hp/245tq 3.4L OHV engine.

its all n/a. and its all in "stock" form.

just some info for everyone to remember.

-R

edit: dyno with cutout open : http://camaro.adwire.com/dyno1.2.jpg

[ October 06, 2003: Message edited by: Russell ]</p>

[Jerriko]

Good deal. I am working on my rebuild now. I'm putting a 3.4L in my 87 Formula. I'm going a little farther though as far as mods are concerned. Regardless, you can take any engine and make it have power. I don't believe in a waste of time when it comes to what you want to do. Anyone who tells you otherwise is an idiot that needs to mind his own business.

[Harbin1]

There's a pic of my dyno in my sig. It was pretty lame, can you say ~127 RWHP! :( That helped my to decide that I'm waiting for my Z28 to come along before I get back into the modding game! [img]graemlins/burnout.gif[/img]

[ianwells100]

i dont wanna knock the 3.4, i had a 3.4L 95 camaro, now i have a 3.8L 97 camaro, so i know, i did some work to the 3.4L (intake, catback...) and it is not nearly as fast as my 97 3.8L was stock, now that i have intake, catback, hi-flow cat... in my 97 3.8L, the 3.4L is no where near being close to as fast as my car...

yes, the 3.4L is a good enough engine, but if you want power, get a v8, i need my car as a nice looking, nice sounding daily driver, 'til i finish my qualifications at uni (then i'll get an LS1)... but for those of you saying 'my 3.4L is quicker than many 3.8L' how? seriously, how, this thread is about getting to 200hp... which very few have, 3.8L's come stock with 200hp, so how can a significantly sub 200hp car beat many 200 (+ with minor mods) hp car (dont get too technical here, i'm just making a clear point), and mustang eater, your best 1/4 mile is in the mid 15's, how can that be faster than a car that comes stock running, low 15's high 14's (or somewhere around there)...

dont make arguements without thinking first, few 3.4's make 200hp, 3.8's come stock 200hp (with 25 ft-lb more, aswell)... so dont try bashing the 3.8L by saying your 3.4L beats many 3.8L's, its an illogical arguement

[ October 06, 2003: Message edited by: ianwells100 ]</p>

[black34v6]

It's not an illogical arguement if its the TRUTH. I love that little cop-out. people that say "stop saying your 3.4 will beat 3.8's cause the 3.4 doesnt come stock with 200 hp..."

well. when you get your Z28, and it can beat vipers, stop saying it can...cause its illogical that it ever could..you see cause - it didnt come with 400 hp stock.

(stupid #@$ arguement) -- anyway. im not saying that the 3.4 is superior to the 3.8. never said it was. what i said was that i have a 200 hp 3.4L. Also - the 3.8, its not its fault it cant do anything in the 96-02 cars, they have OBD2 and dont take as well to mods without a computer reprogram - mostly cause the ODB2 will back out changes to run like stock. (its got a stronger "big brother" program)

and all the 3.8 owners, dont be upset just cause a 3.4 can beat a 3.8. thats just like the z28 owners calling a v6 rice cause they are jealous that it can do better than their car.

I see this all the time. never fails, someone asks about the 3.4, and most of the 3.8 guys/girls (usually guys) come into the thread and are like, well my opinion, since i have a 3.8, is that the 3.4 is weak and you should ditch it.

and dont make the arguement that the 3.4 is sold a lot and 3.8's are bought over it -- my opinion (note: opinion) on that is that the 3.4 is a project motor. it takes a lot of thought and planning to get it to move well. and a lot of people want a lot of power easily. sometimes it doesnt come that way.

but for all of you that think the 3.4L motor is a pos - well..why is the 2.8L run in circle track cars? cause its a naturally bred race engine. its 60* design makes it internally balanced, no ill forces to vibrate engine components and wear them out prematurely.

the 2.8/3.1/3.4 are all the same family. 60* V-6 motors (the engine block has a 60* seperation between the cylinders) and are nicely done. in fact, the 60* design is so loved by GM - they are reintroducing a new line of 60* motors. starting with the 3.2L 60* motor that is in the caddy CTS. making 220 hp / 218 tq. thats not to shabby for a 3.2L. of course it is a DOHC.

whatever..im getting down the long-winded path. just, and im asking this nicely, this board is here for people to learn. if someone wants to learn, let them. dont try to force your ideals and opinions on them. if someone wants to build up their 3.8L motor, i let them..i dont say, it'd be better to buy a v8 or - the 3.8 sucks - or anything like that.

If a 3.4L owner wants to try to build up their engine. let them. dont try to force their opinion to your belief. dont try to suade them with cool power figures or anything like that.

cause as i said, my engine is now a stock 3400 engine (yes STOCK) with a 3.4L RWD camshaft (little more aggressive than the hyd. roller in the 3400) in it, and the MORE RESTRICTIVE 3100 intake (i still have to put the 3400 on there!)

so if the 3.4 is so crappy, (the 3400 is simply the newer generation 3.4, just like the 3800 is the new gen 3.8) why could i just swap pistons (bigger dish, lower cr) - swap heads - swap intakes to the newer design, and get headers, and come out with the same power as a 3.8..

you be the judge of that.

-R